Author Topic: Here’s The Fatal Flaw In Matthew McConaughey’s ‘Common Sense’ Gun Plan  (Read 215 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Kamaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 58,200
Here’s The Fatal Flaw In Matthew McConaughey’s ‘Common Sense’ Gun Plan

It would be nuts to hand the power to restrict gun rights to institutions that have deliberately destroyed the rule of law in this country.

BY: MOLLIE HEMINGWAY
JUNE 08, 2022

Actor Matthew McConaughey visited Washington, D.C., this week to push for what he termed “reasonable, practical, tactical regulations” on gun rights, such as background checks, red-flag laws, and higher age limits.

“We’ve got a chance right now to reach for and to grasp a higher ground above our political affiliations,” he said, and “a chance to make a choice that does more than protect your party, a chance to make a choice that protects our country now and for the next generation.”

Corporate media and other activists praised his call for what they described as “common sense” restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms. But even if people think the solution to the moral rot plaguing the country is to restrict gun rights, there is one very big reason why this plan is not “common sense” at all and why Republicans in Congress would not be able to support it.

Many Americans have a principled objection to restricting gun rights because they are the guard against tyranny that preserves American freedoms. But even for those who don’t hold principled objections to gun-right restrictions, to voluntarily hand over the right and the security it provides American families would require a profound trust in their government that has been obliterated in recent years through widespread corruption.

*  *  *

Who would administer, for example, the background checks and red flag laws that “common sense” gun restricters propose? Would it be the same government that fabricated evidence in a FISA Court proceeding to secure a wiretap to spy on Carter Page for the crime of supporting a politician the FBI opposed?

Would it be the same FBI that hatched a plot to kidnap the Michigan governor, with that truth only coming out during the prosecution of four of the Americans entrapped in the scheme?

Would it be the same government that besieged and burned down a building full of women and children in 1993 in Waco, Texas? Would it be the same government that told the world that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and that was why we needed to start a lengthy war there?

Would it be the same local, state, and federal officials who allowed Antifa and Black Lives Matter activists to destroy countless homes and businesses in dozens of cities, set White House buildings on fire, attack federal courthouses, burn police precincts to the ground, destroy historical markers, and commit other destruction under the guise of “mostly peaceful” protesting?

*  *  *

Source:  https://thefederalist.com/2022/06/08/heres-the-fatal-flaw-in-matthew-mcconaugheys-common-sense-gun-plan/

Offline SZonian

  • Strike without warning
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,734
  • 415th Nightstalker
My first priority would be to define, what, exactly, constitutes a "red flag".

Depending on who one asks, a "red flag" could be me posting a LGB/FJB meme on social media or something similar.

Current atmosphere has me pegged as a "person of interest" by the DHS, an "extremist"...so there's that.
Throwing our allegiances to political parties in the long run gave away our liberty.

Offline sneakypete

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 52,963
  • Twitter is for Twits
I don't remember him ever even hinting at being for gun control back when he was younger,and getting a LOT more movie offers.
Anyone who isn't paranoid in 2021 just isn't thinking clearly!

Offline Elderberry

  • TBR Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,777
Why McConnaughey?

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2022/06/why-mcconnaughey.php

Quote
The White House served up Hollywood star Matthew McConnaughey to lecture us on the virtues of assorted gun control proposals yesterday. He emotes more effectively than press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, but what does he have to offer? He is a native of Uvalde. He feels strongly about the Uvalde massacre. He doesn’t think too much of the Second Amendment. He has a superficial above-it-all take on the culture war. He is a tool of the Biden administration.

Are we seriously supposed to believe that he “feels” more strongly about the massacre than you or I do? That he’s a better person? That he “cares” more? Even if so, which I doubt, it isn’t exactly a public-policy credential.

Amid the media adulation of his performance I would like to put in a bad word. I hate being lectured and having a finger waved in my face. Samuel Johnson’s adage about “the last refuge of a scoundrel” is what comes to mind. I can’t be the only one whom he rubs the wrong way.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJOw0XUyTQs